Discussion in 'Star Wars Saga In-Depth' started by Mr. B, Jan 19, 2015.
You may feel however you like. I am not fighting with you. We simply disagree. Goodnight.
That's the problem I have with the OT-we can only speculate on classical reasons like fear, security, greed,etc, but we don't get to hear Imperials giving reasons for their beliefs. OK so Palpatine convinced the Senate(or manipulated the Senate into agreeing with him) in ROTS that the Empire was for 'justice, peace, security' and it was cheered with 'thunderous applause', but why would people of the Empire generation join around the time of ANH? Why would older folks still be convinced that an Empire is for the greater good after living 19 years through such a system? Shouldn't a bunch of them wake up to reality after a while? 'Your rights are protected as long as you stand with us' **goes off blowing up a weaponless peaceful planet**
Democracies self destruct often too, usually by becoming a dicatorship. Republics, the rule of law as opposed to rule of the majority (mob rule) with democracies. I believe what happened in Star Wars is that the Republic declined into a democracy which set the stage for the Sith to start the clone wars. Then they used the clones wars to futher decline the Republic into a dicatorship.
People supported the Empire because they promised security after such a great war at the price of reduced freedom which the Empire kept chipping away at. There is no security without freedom.
You have a remark to make?
I think many of the high ranking officers were like Tarkin, power hungery a holes, or were afraid to leave the Empire. Part of what you state is why I believe the Empire kept using cloning to supply troops. Troops that would be enginerred to be loyal beyond question. This is why the Empire switching to recruits for stormtroopers makes zero sense.
Well two factors:
1) Thus the rebellion - that's why dictatorships always need a crisis, because they need the population to think they need a dictatorship. This is why North Korea is still technically on a war footing. Otherwise the generations eventually forget about the reason they need a dictatorship.
2) Indoctrination and propaganda
I see this a lot - especially from Americans - but there is really no difference between a democracy and a republic. The latter is a variant of the former...
Thanks for asking, Shatterpoint but I withdraw. It isn't worth the upset.
Would the Clone Wars microseries qualify as "a power fantasy for Jedi fans"?
What with Jedi Masters fighting entire armies alone and winning, or telekinetically smashing landing ships into one another?
He doesn't seem particularly terrified in ANH to me. Tagge does: "We are vulnerable" but not Tarkin.
Yes, yes I've heard it many times before. Doesn't change my stance.
ANH doesn't really tell us much about Tarkin's true motives, and past history. Though the novelization introduction does:
Having exterminated through treachery and deception the Jedi Knights, guardians of justice in the galaxy, the Imperial governors and bureaucrats prepared to institute a reign of terror among the disheartened worlds of the galaxy. Many used the imperial forces and the name of the increasingly isolated Emperor to further their own personal ambitions.
But a small number of systems rebelled at these new outrages. Declaring themselves opposed to the New Order they began the great battle to restore the Old Republic.
From the beginning they were vastly outnumbered by the systems held in thrall by the Emperor. In those first dark days it seemed certain the bright flame of resistance would be extinguished before it could cast the light of new truth across a galaxy of oppressed and beaten peoples...
That's true but Sir gives a lot more than most credit him for.
Well Tarkin COULD be led by fear. Or he COULD be led by greed. Or by something else. But as I was saying in my posts here there are just no scenes elaborating on the justifications he and other Imperials give themselves in the name of the cause. So we are left guessing, and to me that's a clear failure of the OT. It would have felt more real if ANH had given us a few personal Imperial stories to back their beliefs. I didn't think politics were touched nearly enough in the trilogies. And I don't go with the EU(no clue if they elaborated much on things though).
The one thing I could reproach Leia for was naming a planet for the hidden Rebel base. Obviously I am glad she didn't give away the real location as that would have been treasonous to the Alliance, but naming a planet at random could have placed that innocent planet & their inhabitants in grave danger. I mean, what if Tarkin had decided to blow up THAT planet instead of Alderaan? Leia basically traded the safety of Alderaan for the safety of Dantooine people. The best thing in this scenario would have been to not name any planet, or to name a planet void of people(if there was such planets?) so the blowing up of the planet ended up resulting with no deaths. Of course Tarkin would have blown up Alderaan anyway in any scenario as the other planet was 'too remote' for demonstration (probably an excuse he used) but at least Leia wouldn't have placed a random planet full of citizens in potential danger(unless Dantooine was actually void of people? I don't recall any mention of that in the movies though).
EDIT: I've just seen your edit, Cushy, so no need to respond if you don't want to.
Yes, I understand that's your stance on Tarkin. I simply disagree there is no evidence he's led by fear. I think it's quite obvious but as I said, I'm done. BTW, props for admitting Leia was wrong. Few do.
Dantooine was the previous Rebel Base, which they'd recently abandoned.
Leia was hoping Tarkin would go to it, check before shooting it, find it was devoid of Rebels, not shoot it (because that would be pointless) and thus, she's bought Alderaan time, without sacrificing another world in the process.
Cushing's Admirer - please stop hijacking this thread with your 'controversial' theories unless you're prepared to engage in genuine debates regarding them. Simply dropping them into the mix and dismissing any challenges with responses along the lines of "I disagree, but that's fine, I can't be bothered arguing, goodnight", not to mention rolling-eyes emoticons may be interpreted as simply baiting other users. Thanks.
Yeah, I'm done Nub. I have been genuine.
Being more powerful than the enemy isn't really the message - being smarter and braver than the enemy is.
The X-Wings aren't more powerful than the Death Star - but they beat it.
The Ewoks aren't more powerful than the stormtroopers - but they outthink them, luring them and their vehicles into traps.
And so forth.
Being smarter is part of being more powerful, me thinks. My point is: The heroes win through force, not through negotiations and diplomacy.
First they came for Alderaan, and I did nothing, for I am not Alderaanian.
We all know how that ends, right?
There are similarities between the two but Republic and democracy are different. A Republic is representative government ruled by law (the Constitution). A democracy is direct government ruled by the majority (mob rule). However many modern democracies are really republics, so the terms are often misapplied.
I have to say I disagree. There are many different types of democracy, one of which is an Ochlocracy, which is the rule of the majority. The democracy of the United States is known as a liberal democracy. A Republic is merely the system of government. So the United States is both a democracy and a Republic...
Mob rule? Wow....the Senators/MPs...whoever have done a good job on some people. "No, no. People can't know what's right for them...you need us to represent you and...guide you."
How the Republic becomes your Master...
So, to the point. I don't see any 'mob rule' in ROTS which might point to some notion of a Republic 'declining' to 'democracy(in a rather weirdly structured description)'.
i appreciate your eloquent response. you've given some great food for thought here.
I would say though that I chose the phrasing "some fans" carefully, for the specific purpose of avoiding generalities. Appreciating dark characters for the sake of their arcs is a good thing. But again, in my experience many fans aren't actually interested in the arc or the lesson to be learned. for them it's all about how cool it is to be an angry, scary badass.
For many of the more "geek" persuasion, a certain sense of helplessness is pervasive. angst and insecurity are a part of most young peoples lives, but many geeks are also victims of bullying or other situations that leave them feeling angry and out of control. so they naturally turn to these power fantasies where the character is angry like them, but has the means to dispatch his aggressors (often through revenge, a popular fantasy for the helpless).
There's a great article by Film Crit Hulk that goes into these concepts pretty deeply, provided you can get past him writing as the hulk:
and isn't it funny too, how the angst dial can get turned up too high? many fans rejected the notion that the stoic badass Darth Vader could possible have started out as this pathetically whiny, sullen, insecure, lovesick young man. this spoiled the badass image they had assumed for vader. however, as kevin smith pointed out, this is exactly the type of person that could eventually become darth vader- "Darth Vader was once a teenager". Vader's badassery was a mistaken identity. ultimately he was just a malevolent control freak, who succumbed to his own feelings of helplessness. in a stunning case of projection on the part of certain fans, i think the power fantasy was ruined for them, when confronted with the idea that maybe badasses are just insecure, helpless, and petty- that maybe they are like those characters, but that's not a good thing after all.
and again, that points to not really being interested in the arc or the lesson. we want the badassery, we just don't want to see the real character traits that would make such a person.
in regards to the rebel alliance...i think you can see from the debates in this thread alone that they are not above question. "one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist" as they say.
The senators in ROTS seemed to be mob rule. Willing to sacrifice liberty for security to great applause out of emotion. The minority like Padme who did not want the Republic reformed into the Empire were ignored by the majority. A Republic recognizes the inalienable rights of individuals while democracies are only concerned with group wants or needs (the public good). A democracy is majority rule and is destructive of liberty because there is no law to prevent the majority from trampling on individual rights. Whatever the majority says goes! A lynch mob is an example of pure democracy in action. There is only one dissenting vote, and that is cast by the person at the end of the rope. The attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether is be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequence.
A republic is a government of law under a Constitution. The Constitution holds the government in check and prevents the majority (acting through their government) from violating the rights of the individual. Under this system of government a lynch mob is illegal. The suspected criminal cannot be denied his right to a fair trial even if a majority of the citizenry demands otherwise.
Whilst in both cases the government is elected by the people, in Democracy the majority rules according to their whims, whilst in the Republic the Government rule according to law. This law is framed in the Constitution to limit the power of Government and ensuring some rights and protection to Minorities and individuals.
Thoughtout the PT films, Palpatine creates emergencies to get the mob rule to remove more and more of the restrictions on government power at the promise of ending the war (that he created) and increace security for everyone. This is how mobocracy becomes your master, the mob decides what is right for you and with no laws to protect your rights from what the mob wants. If the Republic really was a republic, then it would have had a constitution to limit its power and protect liberty and rights from the current whims of the majority (mob). As I said before, there is no security without freedom, and this is what happens in the OT.